Blake: Labour, Religion, and the State

Word Count - 2132

Blake: Labour, Religion, and the State

If one is to examine William Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience using a Marxist critique, it is imperative to note their similarities through their critcisms of social structures and organised religion. I will be investigating these similarities through Marxist writings and applying Blake's Songs hold sympathy for the working classes and their impoverished struggle against the upper classes, while Marx promoted the abolition of the bourgeoisie class through the removal of private property, their stake to power (Marx and Engels235). Erdman states that Blake held beliefs similar to those drafted into the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (150), a document penned during the French Revolution declaring the rights and duties of all the members of the French State. In the Declaration, it is stated that “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights” (Qtd. in= Erdman, 150). Comparably, Blake spoke of “the beauty and purity of any exercise of liberty that does not 'hinder another'” (Erdman 150). In the Manifesto of Communism, Marx and Engels declare labourers to be “slaves of the bourgeois class, and...State”, attacking the inequalities laid down between social classes. For Blake, this slavery is an obvious hindrance to liberty.

In the poem 'London', the class struggle is drawn sharply against Blake's idealism of social freedoms with the revelations of perceived sufferings for labouring citizens in Blake's time:

“How the Chimney-sweepers cry

Every Blackening Church appals

And the hapless Soldiers sigh

Runs in blood down Palace walls” (Blake 55)

In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels write that “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” ('Manifesto'219). The proletarians or, the working classes of Blake's 'London' are crying, or sighing, out against the clergy and the monarchy, who are some of the classes who hold power. Tomlins suggests that a city which has been “charter'd” reduces the component parts of that city, whether “inhabitant...street...river...the entire city...[has been] contracted out, hired, expropriated, absorbed into an unrelieved commerce in things and people” (196). Mankowitz gives a similar interpretation, saying that every part of London is “limited and confined by its definition” (132). Both of these interpretations reduce London to a very restricted, repressed system of labour due to social conditions. This is akin to Marx's critique of the reduction of man to the sum of his labour ability, and the resultant “naked self-interest” of the bourgeoisie which results in the “shameless, direct, brutal exploitation” of the proletariat class

('Manifesto'222).

Blake's London is an exposition of this brutal exploitation. It displays Blake's opinion of the relationship between the base and superstructure in the city of London (Blake would not have been aware of these terms, as he died before the development of Marxist thought). The labour source, or base, of 'London' is embodied by the chimney-sweeps and soldiers in the poem, which form and support the superstructure, represented by the buildings in which the ruling classes reside. It is significant that the superstructural elements are symbolically charged with the residual marks of the labour of proletarians. Churches blacken with the soot of the chimney-sweeps, darkening with corruption, and the Palace soaks up the blood spilled by the soldier. He recognises the workers as individual people, while reducing the organisations of power to faceless buildings, which are then imbued with characteristics from the working classes from their corresponding preceding lines in the poem. Without the working classes the ruling classes could not perpetuate their power, yet remain faceless and impassive while those who support them suffer.

To re-iterate this point, Eagleton observes that the superstructure is formed from the forces of production, thereby legitimising the power of those in the class “which owns the means of economic production” (5), over those who are part of the labour force. In 'London', we see the results of this oppression in the form of the suffering of the working class as discussed in the previous paragraph. From the superstructure, comes the dominant ideology of any given society. For Marxists, ideology is, a system of beliefs, but as Morawski points out, they are also “always highly complex” (9). David Hawkes regards any notion of a direct reflection between ideology and material conditions as too simplistic and a “logical error” (90). Williams agrees, distinguishing between three different versions of the concept, and argues that there is not a correct definition of 'ideology' when speaking of Marxism (122). It is therefore not a simplistic notion, but it is a system of beliefs held by a society. These beliefs are held and may either be “characteristic of” a group or “false”, according to Williams (122). Whichever of these approaches is taken, however, for Marxist critics “literary texts 'belong' to ideology” (Eagleton 18). Ideology, the system of beliefs held by a society, always permeates literature, and Blake's react to dominant ideology in his poetry can be read as subversive.

Karl Marx's criticisms of the power of the bourgeoisie and the development of capitalism focuses heavily on the reduction of the working man to a commodity, who can “only live so long as they can find work, and...only so long as their labour increases capital” ('Manifesto'227). The figure of the chimney-sweep recurs throughout Songsof Innocence and Experience. It is first seen in the Songs of Innocence, as a victim of the exploitative society in which children were sold into labour. It could be argued that Blake directly addresses the bourgeoisie through the voice of the sweep in 'The Chimney Sweeper':

“When my mother died I was very young,

And my father sold me while yet my tongue,

Could scarcely cry weep weep weep weep.

So your chimneys I sweep & in soot I sweep.” (Blake 20)

The narrator is a child, and is placed into labour almost as soon as his life begins. Because it is then the only thing he knows, he is therefore immediately trapped in the role of worker and reduced to the sum parts of his labour endeavours. Blake is criticising the owners of the chimneys for taking advantage of this, and the owners of the means of production, the bourgeoisie, who force the children into labour. Blake displays a humanitarian compassion for the young chimney-sweepers as well as a general social critique. In my opinion allows the poem to be far more emotive than the theoretical writings of the Marxists, which leads to a greater level of accessibility for a wider, perhaps less educated audience.

Nevertheless, the criticism of the bourgeoisie is indicative that Songs challenges the dominant ideologies of its time, as opposed to the “vulgar Marxist” approach which states that literature will merely reflect these (Eagleton, 16). As Eagleton goes on to say, the relationship between literature and ideology is not as simple as a refutation or acceptance of any ideology, that literature “does not stand in some reflective, symmetrical, one-to-one relation with its object. The object is deformed, refracted” (48). Blake's poem, according to Eagleton (48) is made up of component social influences and his reaction to these. His critical standpoint on the use of child labour suggests a negotiation of these influences to reach a conclusion running against the generally accepted social structure of his time.

'The Chimney Sweeper' alsoreveals Blake's major difficulties in accepting the formation of organised religion. He is well known for his unconventional religious views, and 'prophetic' writing, demonstrated as his poem Milton. In 'The Chimney Sweeper', Blake parodies religion by using an angel to unlock the children's bonds using a key. Tom Dacre awakes in the cold and dark, but happy, because he now knows that if he does his “duty, [he and the other children] need not fear harm.” (Blake 20). He has not escaped his life of labour – Blake uses the idea of a religious epiphany as an escape to juxtapose the miserable conditions of working life, while identifying a Church which does not intervene charitably to help the poor. In 'Holy Thursday', from Songs of Experience, Blake lashes out at the Church, questioning their supposedly charitable actions:

“Is this a Holy thing to see,

In a rich and fruitful land,

Babes reduced to misery,

Fed with cold and usurous hand?” (Blake 18)

The “cold and usurous” hand of the church is all that reaches out to the proletarians of England. Presumably the bulk of produce from the “rich and fruitful land” is the property of the bourgeoisie, as the surplus value of production. Blake is commenting upon the unfair spread of surplus value and product between men. Marx wrote that an owner of the means of production aimed to “produce a use-value that has a value in exchange...[and to] produce a commodity whose value shall be greater than the sum of the values of the commodities used in its production...and labour power” ('Capital' 121). Blake identifies surplus values in Songs. Labour is represented through the subjugated workers of 'London' and 'The Chimney Sweeper'. Surplus wage value is shown in the palaces of the ruling classes in 'London'. The palaces are products paid for by the excess wages reserved by the upper classes for profit. Surplus product is envisaged 'Holy Thursday' where there is a lack of food for the poor despite the presumable excess produce realised in the land's “rich[ness]” (Blake pl.33).

Marx's famous criticism that religion “is the opium of the people” (Philosophy) lays bare the relationship between organised religion and the downtrodden labour forces of Europe. The proletarian class of London were held in check by religion, as the transcendental figure of God, embodied on earth by the clergy, led to the mainstream public beliefs of the Lord's master plan and every man having his place within the plan. Thus, rebellion was crushed before it could ever begin, as the need to rebel against those who held the means of production and control was never felt. Blake held strong religious beliefs, but his rejection of conventional organised religion was based, like Marx, on his perception of it being a part of a society that is oppressive to its citizens, particularly those in the labour force.

Ling argues that “religion is a bulwark of the state...to attack religion was to attack the state.” (9). Blake held strong religious beliefs, while rejecting conventional Anglican Christianity, and Ling defines him as having a radical attitude, “linked with religious fervour” (24). Blake's religious fervour did not anaesthetise him to the realisation that the Church was used by the state as an institution of power. Marx's critique focusses on this point as opposed to the “use of Christian religion” and “applauded” the use of religious beliefs to “challenge oppressive governments” (Ling 16). In his Eclipse of Reason, Max Horkheimer recognises the difference between objective and subjective reason: “[subjective reasoning sets up] two different brackets, one for science and philosophy, and one for institutionalized mythology. For the philosophy of objective reason there is no such way out...it must take a positive or negative stand with regard to the content of established religion” (9). Therefore Blake used subjective reasoning in his critique, and could not take a completely negative stand against religion.

However, this does not untie entirely Blake's connections with the Marxist approach to religion. According to Ferber, Blake condemned the “wedded” forces of “state tyranny [and] religion” (35) demonstrating his recognition of necessary connections between State and Church for religion to become an institutionalised force of social control. However, it could be suggested that since Blake did hold religious beliefs, he could never entirely escape religion's clutch as a form of control, as he recognised a transcendental signifier in God.

Despite this concern, there are clear links between Marxist and Blakean thinking, particularly the similarities of thought held by each on the subjects of labour and religion. In conclusion, Blake's poetry conveys ideals of social form that Marxist thought tends to agree with. Mankowitz's essay draws attention to the constrictive bind of society represented in Blake's poetry, especially in London (132). He suggests that the message Blake wished to put forward is that “Man is limited to being man” (135). I disagree that this is the purpose of Blake's poetry, as it seems far too defeatist. It also suggests that Blake felt trapped within his social boundaries, succumbing and reproducing the dominant ideology. I believe Blake's subversive attacks on socially bound restraint opens borders to rebellious thought and ideologies which undermine the State. Therefore, Blake is promoting the breaking free from the social constrictions displayed in his poetry, and presenting ideas of reformation.

Works Cited

Blake, William. Songs of Innocence and of Experience. 1789. London: Chatto and Windus. 1938. Print.

Eagleton, Terry. Marxism and Literary Criticism. 1976. Methuen. London & New York: Routledge. 1989, 2002. Print.

Ferber, Michael. The Social Vision of William Blake. Surrey: Princeton UP, 1985. Print.

Horkheimer, Max. Eclipse of Reason. 1947. London: Continuum. 1974. Print.

Ling, Trevor. Karl Marx and Religion: In Europe and India. 1980. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Print.

Mankowitz, Wolf. “The Songs of Experience” Songs of Innocence and Experience. 1970. Ed. Margaret Bottrall. Tiptree: Macmillan. 1974. 123-136. Print.

Marx, Karl. Capital. Ed. David McLellan. 1995. Oxford: Oxford UP. 2008. Print.

---. Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Ed. J. O'Malley. Trans. A. Jolin and J. O’Malley. Marxists Internet Archive. Cambridge UP. Web. 14 Mar. 2011.

Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Trans. Samuel Moore. 1888. London: Penguin. 2002. Print.

Morawski, Stefan. Karl Marx, Frederick Engels on Literature and Art. Ed. Lee Baxandall. New York: Clark, Doble and Brendon. 1974. Print.

Tomlins, Christopher. “Revolutionary Justice in Brecht, Conrad and Blake” Law and Literature, Vol. 21.2, Summer, 2009: 185-213. JSTOR. Web. 17 Feb. 2011.

1/8